I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

Hello, my name is John McVey and I’m a resident of Vienna, Virginia. This morning, I’d like to make a statement in support of the HB277-Wireless Infrastructure Bill. Residents of Vienna, Virginia (including within the Town of Vienna), have become far too accustomed to poor mobile coverage. This issue has been present for years and residents and business owners have had enough. Just in Vienna alone, there are four elementary schools that are considered mobile dead zones for AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile – these include: Our Lady of Good Council, St. Mark, Holy Comforter, and Wolf Trap Elementary. Since 2020 there were at least 10 emergency situations on the OLGC campus that were exacerbated by the lack of mobile coverage – for instance, faculty were unable to reach EMS services when a student had a seizure during class, or the police couldn’t be reached when a suspicious person had entered the campus. Outside of school, parents are very frustrated by not being able to reach their children while they’re in Vienna. A local online petition in Vienna has tallied nearly 1,000 signatures in support of resolving this issue. Numerous local businesses within Vienna (for instance, restaurants, banks, grocery stores, pharmacies) have all reported business impacts due to poor mobile phone coverage. For example, a local fast-food restaurant reported that AT&T customers cannot transact and pay for their food using their mobile wallet. This impacts not only local business revenue – but also taxes revenue for both Fairfax County, and Town of Vienna meals taxes. Resolving this issue is essential to maintaining safety and security in Vienna and all communities in Virginia. I’ll end with this and the focus back on school campuses…. poor mobile coverage is a well-known problem in Vienna specifically around schools, this is a significant concern for parents especially given the tragic frequency of school campus incidents happening across the United States. I look forward to the passage of this very important bill. Thank you.

Please support HB457. Parking lot solar is an excellent dual use, which would also reduce the pressure on rural areas and farmland. As Virginia seeks to grow our solar energy, using already-built areas, such as parking lots, makes incredible sense. A recent study found that the average US city devotes about 22% of its space to parking lots. Examples of existing solar parking lots provide significant cost benefits to the commercial establishments, while drawing more customers due to the shade and potential for EV charging. This bill would have the greatest impact in urban areas like Northern Virginia, that has a large number of parking lots suitable for solar canopies. It makes sense that this area, which has the largest power demand, would help to mitigate the impact as well.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

Drive Electric RVA supports HB457 as an important component of Virginia's transition to electrified transportation. Cars spend more than 90 percent of the day parked. Electric vehicles have the ability to refuel while they are parked and their owners go about their day. The installation of solar canopies at workplaces and shopping centers would provide clean energy to fuel EVs during some of this idle time when both solar available and electricity demand are at their peak. This bill would give localities the ability to require that developers who are permitted to erect large parking lots provide a renewable energy resource in exchange. The canopies would also help shade all cars from inclement weather conditions, which are likely to become worse as climate change worsens.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

As a resident and concerned citizen of rural Disputana, Prince George County,(House Dist 82) I strongly opposed to this and all proposed legislation that seek to undermine or override local authority on decisions about land use. I strongly urge you to respect the voices of the people in communities across the Commonwealth and vote NO on HB711 & HB 981. The people, through our duly elected officials, must retain the right and the responsibility to make decisions regarding land use at the local level without interference by politicians from outside our rural communities who have no knowledge of, or interest in, local concerns.

As a resident and concerned citizen of rural Greensville County, I am opposed to this and all proposed legislation that seek to undermine or override local authority on decisions about land use. I strongly urge you to respect the voices of the people in communities across the Commonwealth and vote NO on HB711. The people, through our duly elected officials, must retain the right and the responsibility to make decisions regarding land use in the communities where we live.

Vote NO on HB711 Our planners, supervisors, and zoning authorities work together to plan and develop our town/county on our behalf. It is an extreme overreach for our state government to interfere with this process.

HB11 - This bill seems like a veiled takeover of local government. So the state would have jurisdiction over where solar facilities would be placed with local communities subject to their decisions. Some places like Washington County would end up being forced to deal with solar facilities without any way to protect the land and way of life we enjoy. Our homes would decrease in value, our properties would be negatively affected all so Northern Virginians can have more power. Our elected officials should be able to decide where and if we want solar facilities here based on the voice of the locals. Without state interference.

I strongly oppose this bill, and respectfully ask that legislators vote in accordance with the citizens who elected them. Every Virginia county has had ample time to experiment with the gimmick known as solar, and have witnessed the environmental destruction, lack of revenue, and declining electrical production. Every one of them have serious stormwater violations. This is why so many wise counties have created our own guardrails from this deplorable industry desecrating our lands. That is why we have zoning regulations, for property rights end when our industrial neighbor's actions violate ours! To make each county have to make a case to the SCC to justify a local denial is communistic, and a waste of valuable resources. Definitely an overreach attempt by the State into local governance, and we will not stand for this!

I oppose this bill. Localities should be able to say what goes into their communities.

I oppose this bill. Please help protect our rural lifestyles and life blood from state overreach by people who either don’t understand or don’t care about our land and our way of life. Just because our population is low relative to other counties and definitely poorer shouldn’t mean that outside influences and interests should control our land and our resources and our future. PLEASE vote no on this and any other bill that can force unwanted solar projects on rural communities. Solar projects are industrial production facilities and absolutely not agricultural production.

There is no way this legislation benefits local jurisdictions or our rural. largely farming community. I oppose.

I oppose this bill. No outside interests should undermine local interests or zoning approval.

I oppose removing local control over land use policy.

I strongly oppose HB711 and im asking for you to oppose it also. Our county governments should be in control because it allows its residents to voice their opinion on such matters. If solar is allowed and no county government has the authority to stop them they will take land away from farmers who depend on that land to rent because it’s there livelihood and there is a lot of environmental impact that comes along with developing these solar fields.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I’m asking that this bill be denied. Counties have the right to decide what’s best for the county. The state needs to respect the right and decisions of the residents and the local government.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I respectfully urge you to reject this bill, which would allow a state agency to override a locality’s decision to prohibit or limit utility‑scale solar facilities. This proposal undermines the most fundamental principle of Virginia governance: land‑use decisions belong to local governments, not Richmond. Counties and cities are closest to the people, most familiar with their land‑use plans, and directly accountable to the residents who must live with the long‑term consequences of large‑scale energy projects. Stripping localities of that authority sets a dangerous precedent that reaches far beyond solar. Utility‑scale solar facilities are not minor zoning matters. They involve thousands of acres, heavy industrial infrastructure, long‑term land conversion, and significant impacts on farmland, forests, water resources, and rural character. Local boards evaluate these projects through comprehensive plans, public hearings, and community input. When a locality determines that a project is incompatible with its land‑use goals, that decision should be respected — not overturned by a distant agency with no stake in the community. This bill also creates an uneven and unpredictable regulatory environment. Developers, landowners, and residents all benefit when the rules are clear and locally administered. Allowing a state agency to overrule local zoning invites conflict, litigation, and uncertainty for everyone involved. Virginia has long recognized that energy development must be balanced with local planning, environmental stewardship, and community values. This bill abandons that balance. It elevates the interests of large energy companies over the rights of counties and the people who live in them. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the Subcommittee to defeat this bill and preserve the integrity of local land‑use authority in the Commonwealth. Thank you for your consideration.

I strongly oppose this bill. It is yet another attempt to circumvent local zoning power in favor of a blanket one size fits all approach to regulating and siting industrial solar projects. Please keep in mind that rural counties such as Page are already struggling with undesirable predatory development and need autonomy to make the best LOCAL decisions regarding land use based on available productive farmland, the preservation of their scenery/rural character and siting/sizing of ANY future development according to their Comprehensive Plan. Please do not remove that authority and hurt counties that may not be familiar to those living in urban settings. Our rural land is important to us!

https://www.baconsrebellion.com/all-dominions-solar-plants-failing-their-energy-promises/?fbclid=IwVERDUAPoP61leHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAwzNTA2ODU1MzE3MjgAAR7vAOR0Kw_VSju6rEXaxKzWAAvbcLrdtORL_aXeN1CZ7IA0LOoiMRMZaQ-EqQ_aem_plyHOJaHk9tzb3LHo_ohLA

VOTE NO TO THIS BILL! This bill pushes ordinances onto the county that may not be sufficient in every case. Localities need to retain the right to site their ordinances for every unique situation. SOLAR IS NOT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL SITUATION. Solar clears many acres of trees and farmland. Solar is notorious for DEQ VIOLATIONS!

On behalf of the Sierra Club Virginia Chapter, I urge support for HB711. The bill establishes clear, statewide criteria for local solar ordinances while preserving local authority over project approvals. Standards cover: 1. Where projects go: setbacks from homes, neighbors, and community sites. 2. How projects look: fencing, project height, lighting, and scenic protection. 3. How land is managed: soil conservation, stormwater management, and pollinator-friendly vegetation. 4. Decommissioning: mandatory end-of-life plans with dedicated funds. 5. Workforce quality: competitive wages and apprenticeship opportunities for Virginia workers. This Solar Standards Bill offers a balanced fix: it standardizes local siting rules so projects can be proposed statewide, while preserving full local authority to approve, deny, or modify any individual project.

I strongly oppose this bill. Local government should be making the decision for any industrial solar project. No outside interest should undermine local zoning approval.

This misguided bill strips counties of decision-making authority. Solar companies are notoriously insensitive to the quality of life of rural residents. They go for maximum profits, with inadequate setbacks, placing solar factory panels and large substations very close to people’s homes. How would you like to live 50 to 150 feet from one of those? They do not have sufficient restrictions on storm water run off, with well documented negative effects on adjacent properties. In Page County, where I live, a factory was approved. (Dogwood Solar). The required engineering report by Racey Engineering stated that wells as far as 10 miles away could be at risk. This included the water sources for the town of Luray. The solar company, Urban Grid, subsequently withdrew the project. They also withdrew the application for another (Cape Solar), likely because of setbacks required by the Planning Commission to preserve quality of life and the insistence that the panels be classified as impervious to control run off. These commonsense requirements added to the potential cost, a deal breaker for companies that put profits above people. The piece of land in the latter (Cape) application was hit by a tornado last year. Damaged panel components and metals would have found its way into the many caves and uncharted underground waterways that characterize this region (home to Luray Caverns) for a potentially devastating event. Please do not pass this bill. It will negatively affect rural counties. County governments are best positioned to address the needs for safety and quality of life and they should retain their authority.

I oppose this legislation because it undermines local land-use authority and unfairly advantages solar developers at the expense of community planning and agricultural preservation. By requiring localities to justify adverse zoning decisions to the State Corporation Commission and placing those decisions in a public database, the bill creates pressure on local governments to approve solar facilities—even when they conflict with comprehensive plans or local land-use priorities . Applying this framework to agriculturally zoned land is especially concerning. Agricultural zoning exists to protect working farmland and rural economies, not to serve as a default location for long-term energy infrastructure. Ground-mounted solar facilities remove land from agricultural production for decades and should remain subject to robust local review. I urge rejection of this legislation to preserve meaningful local control.

Strongly oppose this bill. Any decision on county solar projects should be made by local legislation in that county, not at the state level or any outside county group. How in the world is it fair to allow people from/living in counties miles away, decide if solar farms should be approved in a county they do not live in/have any tie to. This bill punishes folks who live in/are from rural counties by allowing an “outside the county” board/group of people, who have no ties to the community, land, legislation, etc. in the rural county, approve a solar farm to be built.

STRONGLY OPPOSE HB711. Keep local zoning decisions local.

I strongly oppose HB 711, which undermines local self-governance & threatens rural Virginia’s way of life. This legislation represents state overreach by stripping localities of meaningful control over large-scale solar development & prioritizing corporate interests over community needs. Rural Virginians deserve the right to decide what is built in their own backyards. I urge you to vote NO on HB 711. Key reasons this bill is harmful: • Erosion of Local Control: Standardized criteria limit localities’ ability to tailor rules to their unique landscapes and values. Rural communities must retain full authority to approve or reject large solar projects. • Threat to Farmland & Heritage: Allowing ground-mounted solar by right in agricultural zones accelerates productive farmland loss, raises land costs, displaces family farms, and weakens Virginia’s agricultural economy. Local governments must retain authority to protect this critical resource. • Inadequate Environmental Safeguards: The minimal setbacks from roads or property lines & permissive land-disturbance standards fail to adequately protect wetlands, streams, forests, & wildlife. Large solar installations risk soil erosion, water pollution, & habitat loss, & localities need stronger authority to prevent irreversible damage. • Karst-Specific Risks: In the Shenandoah Valley’s fragile karst terrain, characterized by sinkholes, caves, & direct surface-to-groundwater connections. Large solar installations pose severe & potentially permanent risks. Altered subsurface hydrology could trigger sinkhole formation or collapse during or after construction. Inadequate stormwater management may contaminate groundwater as runoff infiltrates voids or sinkholes, threatening nearby drinking water wells. Underestimated impervious surfaces or incorrect soil assumptions could result in excessive runoff that exceeds karst-adjusted limits, requiring costly redesigns or leading to system failures. Missing geotechnical studies, such as dye tracing or borings, leave pollutant pathways unknown. These high-severity risks require stricter local oversight, not statewide minimums that fail to account for karst vulnerabilities. • Damage to Property Values & Rural Character: Massive solar arrays threaten scenic landscapes, reduce nearby property values, deter tourism, & erode the peaceful, open character that defines rural VA. Local governments are best positioned to protect natural beauty & community quality of life. • Economic Burden on Local Communities: While out-of-state developers benefit financially, rural taxpayers bear long-term risks from decommissioning failures & limited local economic returns. Communities should retain the right to negotiate or reject projects that impose long-term costs without meaningful local benefits. • Risk to Historic and Cultural Assets: The bill’s vague visual-impact provisions provide insufficient protection for rural historic sites, scenic byways, & cultural landmarks. Local governments, with firsthand knowledge of these assets, must retain zoning authority to prevent their degradation. HB711 weakens the principle of local governance that sustains VA’s diverse communities. Rural areas with sensitive geology stand to lose the most from this centralized approach, which fails to account for long-term environmental & community impacts. Please stand for Virginians by rejecting this bill & preserving every locality’s right to shape its own future.

I oppose HB711, please vote No against a bill that interferes with local government decisions.

I urge you all to oppose any and all legislation in regards to industrial solar and battery storage that takes the power away from localities to decide what is best for them. More specifically HB711. I look out my back door and I see nature, beautiful nature, and I would like to keep it that way, as I am sure the majority of the rural population of this State would agree. Most of us either have known no other way of life, or moved in order to have that way of life. The localities know what their citizens want and expect from the leaders they voted for and the State should not take that away from the localities in order to force a renewable energy that has proven over and over that it is not the right thing anywhere. Please, as you are deciding on this matter, I ask that you look beyond party lines and think of our beautiful State of Virginia. Let's keep it that way! Thank You.

I encourage you to not support HB 711 and HB 891. These two bills infringe on localities rites to site. Both Solar and BESS need to be thoughtfully planned. They are Heavy Industrial sites. They should be in Brown areas and not on prime farm and timber land. The companies are LLCs and can fold up and leave town at any time. Local fire departments are not equipped to handle fires at these sites and the standard is to let them burn. Just look what is ongoing at Moss Landing BESS a year later. It will take a very long time to recovery from that. We have had fires and many DEQ violations here in Virginia. The energy they produce may be “green” but to get to that is not green. Here in Prince George County we had a company that wanted to surround six homes in the middle of the project. Homes should be a mile away from these sites and not 75 to a 100 feet. Every site should be considered locally not by people that do not live here. Roof top is what should be focused on. It needs to be affordable and we should not be penalized from disconnecting from the grid. The electric companies are raising our rates to pay for BESS and Solar while racking in profits. Why are the tax payers penalized while they profit from taking from out rural life. Please do not forget about us.

Comments Document

I OPPOSE this bill that seeks to undermine local authority on siting solar installations, that most importantly, produce so little unreliable electric power that those in existence should be shuttered down. See attachment for how poorly Virginia solar facilities are performing, and held to no regulatory standards!! Virginia localities, especially rural counties, have had our farms, forests, waterways, and view sheds destroyed since this scam was unleashed via the VCEA, and it has only been by wise leadership and Democratic citizen input that each locality has created their own guardrail and ordinances based upon the kinship, history and geography of where we live. We will not stand for state mandates to usurp our local authority on siting solar!

I oppose this Bill, and any Bill, that takes away, reduces, removes, restricts, or eliminates local land use decision making from local, county, city, governments. My voting and support will reflect my position on this.

I am opposed to any bill that would remove land-use decision making from the locality. The State should not be making these decisions.

Once again an effort to take away localities rights to site, words are struck from this bill. Our governor ran on the premises of roof top solar and brown fields. Not enough has been done in those areas, instead of raping prime farmlands and timber with INDUSTRIAL SOLAR. It needs special exceptions and zoning for a reason! There is nothing green about SOLAR. They put out a minimal amount of electricity for how much the cost to install and ultimately the cost of destroying prime agricultural land. Solar IS NOT an agricultural crop. Outside LLC companies care nothing of where they site these acre consuming monstrosity. They can walk away from these projects at any time. Please protect our rural counties!

I am against any bill that usurps the authority of a local government to make decisions about local land.

I wish to express my opposition to HB 711. This bill takes away the authority of local governing bodies to make land use decisions based on what is best for their locality and their residents. Land use should be determined by those directly affected, not by a state ordinance or any person or agency at the state level. Local governing bodies and the citizens they represent understand the economic, cultural, and environmental nuances of the local area and the effects land use has on the local economy and environment while considering the unique culture of each local area. Thus, the local governing bodies representing their local citizens should make these decisions, not government officials and/or members of the General Assembly at the state level. The local citizens will have to live with these land use decisions therefore, their local government representatives should be empowered to make these decisions at the local level. I ask that you please vote NO on HB 711. This bill is a direct effort to allow large, industrial scale solar on agricultural (farm and timber) lands whether the local governing board or planning commission determines such use is inappropriate. These decisions should be made LOCALLY, within the county or town. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.

I am OPPOSED to HB711 because it appears to take land-use decisions away from localities. Striking the following verbiage: "subject to any applicable zoning regulations of the locality" and replacing it with "permitted pursuant to § 15.2-2288.8 unless otherwise permitted by right” is a direct effort to allow large, industrial scale solar on agricultural (farm and timber) lands whether the local governing board or planning commission determines such use is inappropriate. These decisions should be made LOCALLY, within the county or town. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

Please support this bill. Parking lots are great places for solar arrays, and localities should be given all the tools they need to enable renewable energy to be installed in their jurisdiction. There is no risk in giving localities more options for local requirements, the localities need to be trusted to make land use rules that work for them. This bill has no downsides. It forces localities to truly examine the cost of the solar and the cost of the requirement on local development and whether the requirement works economically and socially in their area.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

HB 1234 Please facilitate the ease of employing solar canopies in parking lots for both cheap electricity and utilizing non-green space. HB 549 Please allow localities strong input in tree loss mitigation and replacement in development.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.

I request that you vote no on this proposal. Religious and non-profit organizations in Arlington (where I live) mostly inhabit low-density areas and these do not allow large-scale or even medium scale property development, i.e. currently you may only build up to a six plex on any lot. So this is not a practical way to add affordable housing, as it either requires you to 1) drastically upzone the area where the property is located, and REMOVE it from the "social" purpose of the community. Even with 60% CAF's and 50 years affordability, the property transitions from non-profit and community focused to a "for profit" status over the long term, changing the purpose of that land use. Affordable units make more sense in higher density areas, which Arlington has four approved medium to high density corridors. Or it requires you to get only minimal numbers of units on the subdivided lots, again promoting inefficient land use. Further, these projects, of which Arlington has already had a numbere approved via Special GLUP processes, have involved upzoning and they require very high density, up to 100 units per acre, to qualify for LIHTC credits in Virginia. These projects introduce high density into low density areas, and Arlington has shown that it does not provide the adequat services and infrastructure for such upzoned projects, meaning that the project backfires fiscally on the community in the outyears. Given our current fiscal situation, that is very poor governance. This is not a solution for what we need, which is preservation of low-cost housing, nor more market rate units, with projects converting back to all market rates and churches being sidelined at the end of the affordability period. It also entails significant loss of natural resources as these sites are often homes to large trees and landscaped areas. Arlington has done its part for housing; with montlhy densification projects for more housing, including affordable housing; it does not need to density AGAIN and PERSISTENTLY to remove the little community owned lands still extant in our very small, fully developed jurisdiction

As a member of Charlottesville City Council, I write in full support of HB1279. It will provide a practical, impactful path for faith organizations to more easily build desperately needed affordable housing throughout Virginia

Our historic, urban core member cities are acutely aware of the need for housing and land use tools. Please help us preserve the historic nature of some of America’s oldest cities and neighborhoods. Where it has made sense, many of our cities have done away with parking minimums, allowed ADUs by right, and have welcomed manufactured and modular housing that helps solve affordable housing options and increase housing stock. However, a mandated housing policy such as found in HB 1279 does not serve the greater community, nor does it preserve all that makes our historic older cities great.

Good afternoon, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Tracey Hardney Scott, Housing Chair for the Virginia State Conference NAACP, and I am here in strong support of this legislation advancing affordable housing on land owned by tax-exempt religious and nonprofit organizations. Virginia is facing a severe affordable housing crisis. This bill offers a smart and practical solution by allowing housing to be developed **by right on land already dedicated to serving the public good. By removing unnecessary zoning barriers and discretionary approvals, the bill lowers costs and speeds up the delivery of housing our communities urgently need. We strongly support the requirement that at least 60 percent of units be affordable and that affordability be preserved for **a minimum of 50 years. These provisions ensure long-term stability and help prevent displacement. The bill also balances local interests by subjecting completed developments to local property taxation unless explicitly exempted by the locality. Faith-based and nonprofit organizations have long served as trusted community anchors. This legislation empowers them to be part of the solution while maintaining accountability and public benefit. We respectfully urge your support.

I am the pastor of Community of Faith UMC, located in the Franklin Farm community of Fairfax County. We are actively pursuing using our unused, excess land to build affordable housing based on our long-standing commitment to serving the community through our church and food pantry. For the past 26 years we have continued to witness the growing inability for hard-working individuals and families to live in the communities where they work - and still have enough money for basic necessities. In the early months of our efforts last year, we were met by swift, loud resistance (yard signs, matching t-shirts, angry emails and letters from our POA and closest neighbors) before a concept was even developed! This grass-roots effort came with the threat of expensive lawsuits (the Franklin Farm POA has already spent over $30,000 without willingness to have civil conversations). We need state legislation to streamline the process so that together we can meet the current crisis head on. I implore you to support HB1279 to enable churches and non-profits to efficiently and affordably live out their values while serving the most essential needs of the community without duress or delay. Thank you!

Fairlington Presbyterian Church, where I am pastor, sensed God calling us several years ago to explore how we could better use the large parking lot behind the church that sat empty for most of the week. We eventually entered into an agreement with Wesley Housing, an affordable housing developer who bought a portion of our parking lot to build the Waypoint at Fairlington: 81 apartments with nine set aside for adults with disabilities. The proceeds from the sale of property to Wesley Housing enabled us to renovate the church to make our old building fully accessible for worshippers with disabilities. Now we share space with our neighbors, providing a community daycare, camps and classes for kids, and meeting spaces for support groups. Since that time, other pastors have reached out to me and asked, How can we do what you did? The answer is, you may not be able to. We were blessed - we had the time and resources to navigate a five-year process, with support from local leaders. Many others don’t. Outdated zoning laws and costly rezoning processes often block these efforts - that’s what’s happened to a Presbyterian Church a few neighborhoods away that wanted to build 90 affordable homes for seniors. That's why I am advocating for this legislation. Across Virginia, faith institutions collectively own more than 74,000 acres of land - nearly twice the size of Richmond. At least 30 faith groups have tried to build housing, but fewer than half have succeeded because of local rezoning processes that are lengthy, costly, and unpredictable. We want the state to give the freedom back to faith communities to do what they feel called to do with the land they own, and tell local governments to remove red tape blocking them. The legislation still maintains necessary guardrails for health and safety through administrative approval processes. One researcher estimates that 100,000 American churches may close in the next few decades, based on declining attendance numbers and rising costs of maintaining older buildings. The redevelopment of churches for affordable homes will enable many smaller churches to survive, and continue to benefit their communities. Congregations generate economic value to their communities because they spend locally and hire locally; they host events that bring people to the community who spend money there; they share space in their buildings, at low cost or no cost; and they provide needed resources and services to the community. Statewide zoning reform that makes it easier for congregations to redevelop their properties and keep their doors open will provide multiple benefits to communities, beyond the value of housing.

I stand with VCDL on these bills.